On 9/27/2019 7:04 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
Since we don't know, what exactly a {petaQ} or a {yIntagh} is, I know that probably there's no answer. But I wonder.. How would you pluralize the {petaQ}, {yIntagh}, {toDSaH}, etc ? Would you use {-pu'} or {-mey} ?paq'batlh has petaQmey, referring to people.
But what if they were just scattered all about? Within the context of the paq'batlh verse, I don’t think such a reading is excluded:
nItlhejbogh petaQmeytInuD chaHvaDnIb yan wIjwI' jan je
There's also zero evidence that the beings referred to are scattered about, and the "assembled warriors" are "at your side," addressing Molor. Impossible to be scattered? No, but not very likely either. Almost any plural could be imagined to be "scattered" if you try hard enough.
What this quote doesn't do is prove that you must insult
the petaQ you're addressing by referring to them as
things; it just seems that Molor happens to do so. It seems
obvious that insulting someone with petaQ might lead you
to further insult them by implying they're things instead of
people, so saying petaQmey instead of petaQpu'
might be common, but we have no data to support that.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name